If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Macs EDC XM-L has landed

XM-L emitters produce slightly smaller and brighter hotspots than SST-50 emitters produce. The XM-L may be somewhat brighter overall but it's not going to be a significant difference at the power level the Mac EDC runs at.

Re: Macs EDC XM-L has landed

Originally Posted by fyrstormer

XM-L emitters produce slightly smaller and brighter hotspots than SST-50 emitters produce. The XM-L may be somewhat brighter overall but it's not going to be a significant difference at the power level the Mac EDC runs at.

Yeah, I kinda figured that would be the case, but I just want to see how significant it would be. I love the sst-50 in a p60 format but in mac lights, I wish it had just a hair bit more throw and with the xm-l, I'm sure it would turn it into my perfect edc light.

Re: Macs EDC XM-L has landed

I did take some last night with my wife's camera, but they didn't turn out Tonight is a no go but, I will take some good shots Friday night The XM-L was brighter and had better throw!

I figured the XM-L would be brighter and have better throw.. But hows the beam profile and how is the cleanliness and tint compared to the SST-50.. In my experience XM-Ls have a lot of color shift across the beam. Did Mac source some really good xm-l's ( or maybe some fantastic, well suited reflectors) or is the sst-50 still the most consistent and "coolest" emitter running?

Re: Macs EDC XM-L has landed

Originally Posted by Doug

Shado, how long ago did you order? I ordered about 6 weeks ago and have yet to even get an email Reply from him....

I have one E-Mail from you on 8/22 inquiring about an order status and replied to it on the 24th. Did you send one earlier? I have your lights in process now to ship next week as long as my board shipment arrives.

Just arrived today I will try for some beam shots tonight, but my first impression is that it's a real thrower

Copper Tri-EDC / Copper EDC XM-L

Copper Tri-EDC / Copper EDC XM-L

Thanks
Todd

Wow, those are gorgeous! I changed my order to copper as soon as I saw that it was available. But I gather from my exchange with Mac that he orders the copper stock on demand, so I may be waiting quite a while. Sigh. But clearly, it will be well worth the wait.

Re: Macs EDC XM-L has landed

Thanks for the beamshots. Did you mean to say 18350 or 16340 for the sst-50?

Looks like the xm-l has a brighter hotspot than the sst-50 but the beam profile is actually very similar. If anything, maybe the xm-l has a slightly tighter hotspot, but not as much as I would have thought.

Re: Macs EDC XM-L has landed

Originally Posted by badtziscool

Thanks for the beamshots. Did you mean to say 18350 or 16340 for the sst-50?

Looks like the xm-l has a brighter hotspot than the sst-50 but the beam profile is actually very similar. If anything, maybe the xm-l has a slightly tighter hotspot, but not as much as I would have thought.

Tri vs XM-L

Appreciate the photo to compare the two. I was leaning towards the XM-L and awaiting beam shot comparisons. I was surprised that the XM-L is a bit longer than the Tri. Beam performance aside, which one balances and holds better? Between the Tri and XML, does one heat more when run on high for more than short bursts?

By the way, the copper on the Tri still looks great. Do you routinely clean it? I got a maratac copper AAA and it tarnishes shortly in time (even with no usage). I would be very pleased if this is how it ages.

Re: Tri vs XM-L

Originally Posted by JHCANDLEPOWER

Appreciate the photo to compare the two. I was leaning towards the XM-L and awaiting beam shot comparisons. I was surprised that the XM-L is a bit longer than the Tri. Beam performance aside, which one balances and holds better? Between the Tri and XML, does one heat more when run on high for more than short bursts?

By the way, the copper on the Tri still looks great. Do you routinely clean it? I got a maratac copper AAA and it tarnishes shortly in time (even with no usage). I would be very pleased if this is how it ages.

Best Regards

They both feel good in hand and I don't notice a difference in balance. The Tri-EDC heats up a little quicker than the XM-L, but it's not an issue with either in Copper! Most of my lights sit under Glass or in Pelican Cases and don't need regular cleaning. I do carry a Brass Hinderer pen and posted my results Here. Mac makes great lights and I don't think you will be disappointed with whatever you choose!

Re: Tri vs XM-L

You know, Mac's website says that he measured 575 lumens from the EDC XM-L and 490 lumens from the TRI-EDC. Could the perceived difference in the ceiling bounce be because the xm-l produces a tighter spot? I've read that floody beams look brighter than tight beams in ceiling bounce tests even when the output is close on both lights. I think because of the flooded light is hitting a broader reflective surface on the ceiling?

Re: Tri vs XM-L

Originally Posted by calflash

You know, Mac's website says that he measured 575 lumens from the EDC XM-L and 490 lumens from the TRI-EDC. Could the perceived difference in the ceiling bounce be because the xm-l produces a tighter spot? I've read that floody beams look brighter than tight beams in ceiling bounce tests even when the output is close on both lights. I think because of the flooded light is hitting a broader reflective surface on the ceiling?

Very difficult to say. One possiblility might be that Mac measured them with freshly charged cells. Perhaps shado did his ceiling bounce a little while later and by this time the XM-L may have dropped more than the TRI-EDC. I do know that any small battery supplying 2.8A will drop the amount of current it can supply extremely quickly.

We are all flotsam and jetsam being carried by a relentless tide towards our ultimate fate!